Headlines

Glenn Reynolds

A week after an American tragedy, what have we learned?

1. When Twenty Minutes Is Forever. According to the CNN timeline for the Sandy Hook tragedy, “Police and other first responders arrived on scene about 20 minutes after the first calls.” Twenty minutes. Five minutes is forever when violence is underway, but 20 minutes — a third of an hour — means that the “first responders” aren’t likely to do much more than clean up the mess.

This has led to calls — in Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, St. Louis — for armed officers or staff at schools. Some object. But we have people with guns protecting airports, hospitals and politicians. And leading anti-gun crusaders like New York’s billionaire Mayor Mike Bloomberg and press lord Rupert Murdoch are protected by armed security teams that could probably topple some third-world governments. Why are our children less worthy of protection?

Then there are our homes. If police took twenty minutes to respond at a school, how likely are they to get to your house in time? For those of us without “security teams,” the answer isn’t reassuring.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Then there are our homes. If police took twenty minutes to respond at a school, how likely are they to get to your house in time?

It depends if they care. I’ve reported late night intruders in my yard twice to the local police and only once did they show up. They drove down my driveway and scanned the yard then turned around and left. Never even came to the door.

It’s not just that the police cannot protect you. They don’t even have to come when you call. In most states the government and police owe no legal duty to protect individual citizens from criminal attack. The District of Columbia’s highest court spelled out plainly the “fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen.”[5]

In the especially gruesome landmark case the “no-duty” rule got ugly. Just before dawn on March 16, 1975, two men broke down the back door of a three-story home in Washington, D.C., shared by three women and a child. On the second floor one woman was sexually attacked. Her housemates on the third floor heard her screams and called the police.

The women’s first call to D.C. police got assigned a low priority, so the responding officers arrived at the house, got no answer to their knocks on the door, did a quick check around, and left. When the women frantically called the police a second time, the dispatcher promised help would come—but no officers were even dispatched.

The attackers kidnapped, robbed, raped, and beat all three women over 14 hours. When these women later sued the city and its police for negligently failing to protect them or even to answer their second call, the court held that government had no duty to respond to their call or to protect them. Case dismissed.

1. When Twenty Minutes Is Forever. According to the CNN timeline for the Sandy Hook tragedy, “Police and other first responders arrived on scene about 20 minutes after the first calls.” Twenty minutes. Five minutes is forever when violence is underway, but 20 minutes — a third of an hour — means that the “first responders” aren’t likely to do much more than clean up the mess.

Do we still have any definitive proof, other than this single CNN cite, that it did in fact take the Newtown cops 20 minutes? After all, the Newtown police station is less than 5 miles from Sandy Hook Elementary. In all of the news coverage of Newtown, the only 20 minutes claim has come from CNN.

I have seen this one CNN account of what happened repeated and repeated since the shootings, but mostly by the Left. I think Professor Reynolds, whom I highly respect otherwise, should have confirmed that the 20 minute story was correct. For all we know it’s not.

Lefty media hack question: Burglars are almost never armed with an assault weapon. Why do you need one to defend yourself?

Logical response: Whatever the burglar is armed with, my best defense is to ensure that MY weapon will be more effective. If he’s only got a knife, and handgun will probably do the trick. What if he’s got a pistol or a shotgun? AR-15 with a 30 round magazine sounds pretty good.

True. Our Police Commissioner came right out and said that it was not the duty of the police to protect. Their job was to try and ensure that justice was served by catching the criminal. That and creating more revenue for the city by stopping people for traffic violations.

It’s become a cliché, but the thing to do in such an emergency is to tell the 911 team on the line with you (if you can get to a phone) that you do have a gun (whether you do or not) and you are going to use it to defend yourself.

By Gawd, nothing will make them respond faster. This method has been tested on many an occasion in northern California.

The disturbed dude in upstate New York who ABC “News” is now claiming committed a “Sandy Hook-Style Crime” (simply because of the brand name of the gun he used!) had killed his previous victim (his grandma) many years ago. With a hammer.

We did lock him up for 17 years at the time, but none of the New York States Democrats ever demanded that hammers should require a background check or waiting period, or that hammers should be banned.

It depends if they care. I’ve reported late night intruders in my yard twice to the local police and only once did they show up. They drove down my driveway and scanned the yard then turned around and left. Never even came to the door.

Dr. Frank Enstine on December 26, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Gee. That would be helpful if they were inside with a knife to your throat.